Survival benefit of mantle cell lymphoma patients enrolled in clinical trials; a joint study from the LYSA group and French cancer registries

Front-line and second-line treatment for mantle cell lymphoma in clinical practice: A multicenter retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

There are few reports of clinical practice treatment patterns and efficacy in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively studied a large, multicenter, cohort of patients with MCL diagnosed between 2000 and 2020 in eight institutions.

RESULTS

536 patients were registered (73% male, median of 70 years). Front-line treatment was based on high-dose cytarabine, bendamustine, and anthracyclines in 42%, 12%, and 15%, respectively. The median PFS for all patients was 45 months; 68, 34, and 30 months for those who received high-dose cytarabine-based, bendamustine-based and anthracycline-based therapy. 204 patients received second-line. Bendamustine-based treatment was the most common second-line regimen (36% of patients). The median second-line PFS (sPFS) for the entire cohort was 14 months; 19, 24, and 31 for bendamustine-, platinum-, and high-dose cytarabine-based regimens, with broad confidence intervals for these latter estimates. Patients treated with cytarabine-based therapies in the front-line and those with front-line PFS longer than 24 months had a substantially superior sPFS.

CONCLUSION

Front-line treatment in this cohort of MCL was as expected and with a median PFS of over 3.5 years. Second-line treatment strategies were heterogeneous and the median second-line PFS was little over 1 year.

A French multicentric prospective prognostic cohort with epidemiological, clinical, biological and treatment information to improve knowledge on lymphoma patients: study protocol of the "REal world dAta in LYmphoma and survival in adults" (REALYSA) cohort

Background

Age-adjusted lymphoma incidence rates continue to rise in France since the early 80’s, although rates have slowed since 2010 and vary across subtypes. Recent improvements in patient survival in major lymphoma subtypes at population level raise new questions about patient outcomes (i.e. quality of life, long-term sequelae). Epidemiological studies have investigated factors related to lymphoma risk, but few have addressed the extent to which socioeconomic status, social institutional context (i.e. healthcare system), social relationships, environmental context (exposures), individual behaviours (lifestyle) or genetic determinants influence lymphoma outcomes, especially in the general population. Moreover, the knowledge of the disease behaviour mainly obtained from clinical trials data is partly biased because of patient selection.

Methods

The REALYSA (“REal world dAta in LYmphoma and Survival in Adults”) study is a real-life multicentric cohort set up in French areas covered by population-based cancer registries to study the prognostic value of epidemiological, clinical and biological factors with a prospective 9-year follow-up. We aim to include 6000 patients over 4 to 5 years. Adult patients without lymphoma history and newly diagnosed with one of the following 7 lymphoma subtypes (diffuse large B-cell, follicular, marginal zone, mantle cell, Burkitt, Hodgkin, mature T-cell) are invited to participate during a medical consultation with their hematologist. Exclusion criteria are: having already received anti-lymphoma treatment (except pre-phase) and having a documented HIV infection. Patients are treated according to the standard practice in their center. Clinical data, including treatment received, are extracted from patients’ medical records. Patients’ risk factors exposures and other epidemiological data are obtained at baseline by filling out a questionnaire during an interview led by a clinical research assistant. Biological samples are collected at baseline and during treatment. A virtual tumor biobank is constituted for baseline tumor samples. Follow-up data, both clinical and epidemiological, are collected every 6 months in the first 3 years and every year thereafter.

Discussion

This cohort constitutes an innovative platform for clinical, biological, epidemiological and socio-economic research projects and provides an opportunity to improve knowledge on factors associated to outcome of lymphoma patients in real life.

Trial registration

2018-A01332–53, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03869619.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-10433-4.

Outcomes of bendamustine- or cyclophosphamide-based first-line chemotherapy in older patients with indolent B-cell lymphoma

Clinical trials comparing bendamustine/rituximab (BR) with cyclophosphamide-based regimens (RCHOP/RCVP) have pooled various histologies of indolent B-cell lymphomas. We examined real-life outcomes of older patients with follicular (FL), mantle cell (MCL), or marginal zone/lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma (MZL/LPL), treated with these first-line regimens. We identified Medicare beneficiaries with FL, MCL, or MZL/LPL, who received either first-line BR or RCHOP/RCVP in 2009-2016, and matched groups using a propensity score. Outcomes of claims-based event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, secondary cancers, and costs were compared in the aggregate cohort (N = 2736), and in separately matched histology-specific subcohorts. In the aggregate cohort, EFS was better with BR than with RCHOP/RCVP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.87). Acute toxicity was lower with BR, including rates of hospitalizations (33% vs 45%), infections (21% vs 30%), cardiovascular events, and transfusions, yet OS did not differ (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.91-1.17) and Medicare spending was higher. There was no difference in the cumulative incidence of secondary cancers (subhazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.83-1.48). The EFS advantage of BR was pronounced in MCL (N = 690; HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54-0.76), but less so in FL (N = 1330; HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-0.98) and absent in MZL/LPL (N = 574; HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.73-1.17). Despite improved EFS and lower toxicity, the shift from RCHOP/RCVP to BR in clinical practice did not improve OS for older patients with indolent B-cell lymphomas. Frequent infections and hospitalizations underscore the need for safer treatment approaches in this population. Secondary cancers do not appear to be increased after BR compared with RCHOP/RCVP.

Correcting for misclassification and selection effects in estimating net survival in clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Net survival, a measure of the survival where the patients would only die from the cancer under study, may be compared between treatment groups using either "cause-specific methods", when the causes of death are known and accurate, or "population-based methods", when the causes are missing or inaccurate. The latter methods rely on the assumption that mortality due to other causes than cancer is the same as the expected mortality in the general population with same demographic characteristics derived from population life tables. This assumption may not hold in clinical trials where patients are likely to be quite different from the general population due to some criteria for patient selection.

METHODS

In this work, we propose and assess the performance of a new flexible population-based model to estimate long-term net survival in clinical trials and that allows for cause-of-death misclassification and for effects of selection. Comparisons were made with cause-specific and other population-based methods in a simulation study and in an application to prostate cancer clinical trial data.

RESULTS

In estimating net survival, cause-specific methods seemed to introduce important biases associated with the degree of misclassification of cancer deaths. The usual population-based method provides also biased estimates, depending on the strength of the selection effect. Compared to these methods, the new model was able to provide more accurate estimates of net survival in long-term clinical trials.

CONCLUSION

Finally, the new model paves the way for new methodological developments in the field of net survival methods in multicenter clinical trials.

Current overview and treatment of mantle cell lymphoma

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma with historically poor long-term survival compared with other B-cell malignancies. Treatment strategies for this disease are variable and dependent on symptoms and patient fitness. Despite recent advances, MCL remains incurable and patients with high-risk disease have particularly poor outcomes. This review focuses on recent developments that enhance our understanding of the biology of MCL and new treatment approaches that have led to substantial improvements in clinical outcomes. We will outline induction immuno-chemotherapy and maintenance strategies in transplant-eligible patients. In addition, effective strategies for patients unfit for intensive induction will be discussed, with a particular focus on novel molecular therapies with activity in MCL. Lastly, a number of ongoing clinical trials will be presented; the data from these trials are anticipated to redefine standards of care in the near future.

Time to treatment is an independent prognostic factor in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas

In aggressive lymphomas, discrepancies in survival reported from experimental and observational studies may reflect selective non-enrolment of high-risk patients in trials. We examined the association between time from diagnosis to chemotherapy and overall survival in diffuse large B-cell (DLBCL), Burkitt (BL), mantle cell (MCL) and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), using National Cancer Data Base records of 130 549 patients treated in 2004-2014. Across the histologies, patients who started chemotherapy within 7 days of diagnosis had more often high International Prognostic Index (IPI) or advanced-stage disease. The discrepancy in 3-year survival between groups treated within 7 or >30 days from diagnosis ranged from 14% in BL to 30% in MCL. After adjusting for the IPI, time to treatment was significantly associated with shorter overall survival. Using the group treated >30 days from diagnosis as reference, patients treated within 7 days had a hazard ratio of 1·38 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1·28-1·48] in DLBCL, 1·42 (95% CI, 1·22-1·66) in BL, 2·23 (95% CI, 1·79-2·78) in MCL and 1·46 (95% CI, 1·18-1·81) in PTCL. Time from diagnosis to treatment may reflect high-risk features uncaptured by standard prognostic assessments. Clinical trials should accommodate patients who need urgent therapy to improve external validity and detect treatment effects in high-risk groups.